Apocalypse Now.....or later?

My son explained his theory on something else he thinks Mother Nature herself has been trying to implement to reduce population growth and what us, the human race, is doing to beat these plans.

In at least 2 instances, Aids and Ebola, nature has introduced a new natural killer intended to wipe out huge numbers of humans, we have managed to either beat or mitigate by science and/or medicine these two. He believes more such diseases will appear over the next few years and eventually one of them will get the job done.

I think it's a strange theory but I do wonder if perhaps there is a grain of truth in it. I've heard ex military friends saying a really big killing war is what we need to aid population control so perhaps my son's theory isn't as daft as it sounds and it's less extreme than a world war.
He's on to something - Pandemic Influenza is still top of the risks (though as a caveat, this document is due an update this year. CCS at the Cabinet Office have a few other things on their plate...)
NRR.jpg

NRR b.jpg
 
Climate change caused by man is a load of Bollox! The earths climate has always changed and is caused by many things, such as: The earth is nothing more than a crust floating on a large ball of molten iron, the flow of this iron causes shifting in the earths magnetic field which affects the ionosphere, also the sun plays a big part and has it's own cycles - where radiation, solar flares affect our ionosphere and cause spikes in weather, temperature. Yes - sure there's pollution from burning fossil fuels and from plastics etc, but that is not really causing the change in weather. Over the billions of years of earths history we have had points where there was a rich oxygen atmosphere which was good for animals, also we have had points where we've had lots of carbon dioxide - which was good for the plants, we've also had many ice ages, and periods where most of the land mass was tropical and humid. Earths temp will always fluctuate. These twats trying to blame it on people are only interested in seeing you taxed more - nothing more and nothing less.

Also the earths temp is natures way of keeping the planet in check - with the current population growth of humans, the earth needs some sort of mass cull to kill off billions of humans anyway.
The earth has changed, organisms have caused change and extinctions, like the great oxygenation or strombotalites.

We are doing that now.

The morality of it is a separate issue from it happening. Strombotalites didn’t care. Maybe we shouldn’t. That does not stop the effect of changing atmospheric composition.

If you know so much better, publish, be damned, make your fortune. Or perhaps your lack of caring is like a strombotalite. You are having an effect but don’t care about the impact.

It doesn’t make the impact any less.
 

mrdude

War Hero
The earth has changed, organisms have caused change and extinctions, like the great oxygenation or strombotalites.

We are doing that now.

The morality of it is a separate issue from it happening. Strombotalites didn’t care. Maybe we shouldn’t. That does not stop the effect of changing atmospheric composition.

If you know so much better, publish, be damned, make your fortune. Or perhaps your lack of caring is like a strombotalite. You are having an effect but don’t care about the impact.

It doesn’t make the impact any less.
People should stop breeding then - what will YOU do about that?, The world population has exploded in the last 500 years. More people means more food, fossil fuels etc - they only way around the problem is to have a mass extinction event for humans - the worlds had at least 5 of these for other animals that we know about so far. If humans keep breeding at the rate they are - the last thing you'll need to worry about is global warming.
 
Loving this:
16AF85B8-1CB5-493F-8D8C-D5B38089D30F.jpeg


Impressive attention to H&S (note the footwear), wouldn’t want anyone slipping on the ice or anything...
 
People should stop breeding then - what will YOU do about that?, The world population has exploded in the last 500 years. More people means more food, fossil fuels etc - they only way around the problem is to have a mass extinction event for humans - the worlds had at least 5 of these for other animals that we know about so far. If humans keep breeding at the rate they are - the last thing you'll need to worry about is global warming.

Luckily my poor life choices do not change the science behind climate change.
 
The falling birth rate is hopeful, however mass migration will put a stop to that.
Since the graph is the world population what mass immigration are you expecting, from Mars, Beetlejuice, Proxima 6, Magrathea.

You are however correct the falling birth rate is very significant, once we stabilise the population we have a chance of addressing the issue.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Nice ad hom.
My point was how old is nasa data?
In fact we are mere specks in planetary history so how can we even claim x, y and a its plain arrogance and a new religion
 
My point was how old is nasa data?
In fact we are mere specks in planetary history so how can we even claim x, y and a its plain arrogance and a new religion
Palaeoclimatology can reproduce global temperatures going back millennia.

We may be specks in history but we are having an effect. See strombotalites.

It is not an arrogance - the ozone layer hole is proof of this.

The extent to which our emissions will change the climate is to be seen. It will have an effect. Those doom mongerers using worst case scenarios as likely scenarios are extremists and mostly watermelons.

That does not alter the basic premise.
 
Palaeoclimatology can reproduce global temperatures going back millennia.

We may be specks in history but we are having an effect. See strombotalites.

It is not an arrogance - the ozone layer hole is proof of this.

The extent to which our emissions will change the climate is to be seen. It will have an effect. Those doom mongerers using worst case scenarios as likely scenarios are extremists and mostly watermelons.

That does not alter the basic premise.
Small point, are you sure about that spelling? I've always seen it written as stromatolite.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Palaeoclimatology can reproduce global temperatures going back millennia.

We may be specks in history but we are having an effect. See strombotalites.

It is not an arrogance - the ozone layer hole is proof of this.

The extent to which our emissions will change the climate is to be seen. It will have an effect. Those doom mongerers using worst case scenarios as likely scenarios are extremists and mostly watermelons.

That does not alter the basic premise.
Careful the Pope and most of Texas deny dinosaurs existed. Cant go round upsetting so called Christian's now
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
SkippedOnce The Science Forum 78
Ciggie The NAAFI Bar 2
llech Cars, Bikes 'n AFVs 171

Latest Threads

Top